Role in IT decision-making process:Align Business & IT GoalsCreate IT StrategyDetermine IT NeedsManage Vendor RelationshipsEvaluate/Specify Brands or VendorsOther RoleAuthorize PurchasesNot Involved

Work Phone:

Company:

Company Size:

Industry:

Street Address

City:

Zip/postal code

State/Province:

Country:

Occasionally, we send subscribers special offers from select partners. Would you like to receive these special partner offers via e-mail?YesNo

Your registration with Eweek will include the following free email newsletter(s):News & Views

By submitting your wireless number, you agree that eWEEK, its related properties, and vendor partners providing content you view may contact you using contact center technology. Your consent is not required to view content or use site features.

By clicking on the "Register" button below, I agree that I have carefully read the Terms of Service and the Privacy Policy and I agree to be legally bound by all such terms.

WEBINAR:On-Demand

Im really getting tired of bought and paid for "independent" studies showing how much more wonderful Windows is than Linux.

Who do they think theyre kidding? Does anyone actually believe what it says in the latest Microsoft-sponsored study, "The Total Cost of Security Patch Management," that patching Windows and its applications is cheaper than patching Linux and open-source programs?

Lets take a look under the executive summary of this report, shall we?

First, Wipro, which conducted the study, is a global solutions integrator with a strategic relationship with Microsoft. Indeed, part of what Wipro does is build "financial models and ROI (Return on Investment) calculators for Microsoft product deployments."

Its bad enough when Microsoft pays analyst companies like Forrester to produce reports that praises Microsoft, but these Wipro guys arent even analysts. Theyre salesmen for Microsoft.

Nevertheless, these analysts conclude from their survey of 90 companies that even though Windows systems require more patching, its easier and cheaper to patch Windows than it is to patch open-source software.

Really?

I have twenty-four systems in-house and theyre equally divided between Windows and Linux systems. I use automated tools to update both of them. I see very, very little difference between them in upgrading either one.

The only reason I use so many programs is that Im in the business of testing technology to a fare-thee-well. If I were just running a business, Id use the Shavlik program and ZENworks.

If I wanted to, I could also use such basic Linux programs as Apt-get and Cron to make scripts to automatically update my systems. Net cost: $0.

But, heres the truth of the matter: Simply patching either operating system is trivial if you know what youre doing. Period.

Concluding from the data in this report that it somehow takes up significantly more time, money or resources to update Linux systems is science fiction. If I want sci-fi, Ill go see "Revenge of the Sith" this weekend.

Advertiser Disclosure:
Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which QuinStreet receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. QuinStreet does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.